Divorce, TPOs, Pistols, Mace or Other Sprays

[gdcleanfun]

Needing some advice, opinions, thoughts, please. A relative wants to purchase a pistol for self defense against her soon-to-be-ex husband. She and the kids have TPOs, or restraining orders, against him. :angry::angry: Can she purchase a pistol with a TPO in place? Does that have any bearing on the purchase of a firearm? I believe that he's taken a TPO out on her but in a different county, same state. Would mace or another pepper spray be legal for her to purchase/carry? They are both in separate towns in Nevada, if that makes any difference. She doesn't have a lawyer, neither do I. Thanks, all, for responding to any or all of our questions.

 

[Glock Fan]

Best thing to do would be to hire an attorney specializing in family law. This attorney can explain the conditions of the protection order if the conditions aren't clear. In most cases, if an individual has a protection order against them, they are prohibited from posessing firearms and ammunition. Taser guns may also be restricted. Defensive sprays are usually o.k., but there's a chance that the use of such spray in a "defensive" situation may be questioned depending on who it was used on and the circumstaces surrounding the use.

Best bet would be to contact an attorney. First and foremost objective would be to take care of the the children and protect them from any harm (physical and psychological). Next would be to obtain competent legal counsel to quash the protective order.

Hope this helps.



gf

 

[Shoots Running]

If she's about to be divorced and doesn't have an attorney, she needs to get one pronto. That seems really weird to me. I'm sure (?) there's a good reason, but she's putting herself at risk in many, many ways.

 

[mom of 3 angels]

From Form 4473--the long ol' ATF form you fill out when purchasing a gun:

11. h. Are you subject to a court order restraining you from harassing, stalking, or threatening your child or an intimate partner or child of such partner?
If you answer yes, the dealer is not supposed to sell you the gun.

More details from the definitions/explanation section:
Question 11.h. Definition of Restraining Order: Under 18 U.S.C. (squiggly mark) 922, firearms may not be sold to or received by persons subject to a court order that: (A) was issued after a hearing which the person received actual notice of and had an opportunity to participate in; (B) restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child; and (C)(i) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child; or (ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury. An "intimate partner" of a person is: the spouse or former spouse of the person, the parent of a child of the person, or an individual who cohabitates or cohabitating with the person.

So if she has a restraining order placed on him, no problem, but if she has one placed on her that fits the requirements in the definition (parts A, B, and one of the parts of C), then she won't be able to purchase a firearm of any kind. I don't know about local regulations, but mace/pepper spray should not be a problem for her to purchase.

I'll have to agree with the other posts about legal counsel on this one . . . good luck.

 

[gdcleanfun]

Thanks all.
Yup, I've let her know that the paralegal she is using is not supposed to give her advice, (it works that way in Kalifornia and I believe the law reads the same in Nevada, no advice except from attorneys.) I'm blue in the face from telling her to get an attorney. They both claim they have no money, but that's no excuse IMO. She tells me that he told the kids during one of his supervised visits that he took out a TPO on her but it hasn't been served on her. Her's has been served on him. The judge was going to grant unsupervised visitation until, in chambers, the oldest child told the judge about the fathers' arrest, incarceration, and later continued abuse. What a mess! I'll let her know that she may be able to carry a spray. We'll look into that further.

 

[Glock Fan]

Cross filing of protection orders is very common in divorce cases. I've served many out of state orders here in PRHI. Many are enforceable in part even if they're not served (like the prohibition on having firearms). I've seen some very interesting things go on within the legal system. Many attorneys will do work for an initial retainer, then bill the balance. Check with the local bar association for attorneys that will do "Pro Bono" work. A good paralegal should know this.

Good luck!



gf

 

[Hubs]

Can she be "given" i.e. "loaned" a gun, rather than purchasing one? It seems that there is domestic violence involved. Statisically, domestic violence almost always escalates(soon-to-be ex has already been arrested and served time).

 

[Glock Fan]

Can she be "given" i.e. "loaned" a gun, rather than purchasing one? It seems that there is domestic violence involved. Statisically, domestic violence almost always escalates(soon-to-be ex has already been arrested and served time).

Be very careful. Many orders of protection specifically state "posession" or "control" of firearms or ammunition. I highly recommend consulting an attorney before taking any action.



gf

 

[gdcleanfun]

I agree, I wouldn't give to her nor would I want anyone else to give her any type of firearm, especially if she is subject to restrictions even if she has not been served with a TPO. She surely doesn't need to be locked up and then the kids have neither of the parents! That would do no one any good! But we've discussed her having a spray, and maybe that's still an option, we don't know. Is there a site online where lawyers can answer questions for each state? This stuff can be scary, and not because of the date. :sad: Thanks again for all the help.

 

[Glock Fan]

If she's in the state of NV, check out the Nevada Bar Assocation website: SBN Home If she's in CA: www.calbar.org

Both sites have a referral service and an area with some general information.



gf

 

[S&WM&P40]

I can only hope this has a happy ending and i do not see her and the kids on the news and him in hand cuffs. As is so often the case. Let us know what happens.

 

[gdcleanfun]

Thank you for your well wishes! We are trying our best to keep it all "civil," hoping for a peaceable outcome!

 

[PepperSprayKing]

Thank you for sharing useful information.you need to get an F.I.D. card to purchase and carry. Contact your local police station they can tell you what you need. You may need to take a hunter's safety course even for just pepper spray/mace not 100% sure.

 

[wuzfuz]

Divorce, TPO's etc.

Huibs, in most states, it is illegal for anyone except an attorney to give legal advice. I know in Arizona, it opens one to a $300 fine for giving advice if not an attorney. Also, as far as loaning or giving a gun, this puts the loaner or giver in the position of being a 'straw possessor.' Just this week, Judge Jeanine Pirro lambasted a woman who went to buy a gun for her boyfriend because he could not get one. Her permit had expired, so she was unable to obtain a gun for him and Judge Pirro told her she was doggone lucky. Had she bought a gun for him and he used it in a crime, she is liable. I had the local police contact me one time about a gun I had once owned, as it had been used in a crime. I had traded it to a local gunshop, and had all the paperwork to show the legal trade. Had I not had that, My tail would have been swinging in the breeze.

 

[Glock Fan]

Huibs, in most states, it is illegal for anyone except an attorney to give legal advice. I know in Arizona, it opens one to a $300 fine for giving advice if not an attorney. Also, as far as loaning or giving a gun, this puts the loaner or giver in the position of being a 'straw possessor.' Just this week, Judge Jeanine Pirro lambasted a woman who went to buy a gun for her boyfriend because he could not get one. Her permit had expired, so she was unable to obtain a gun for him and Judge Pirro told her she was doggone lucky. Had she bought a gun for him and he used it in a crime, she is liable. I had the local police contact me one time about a gun I had once owned, as it had been used in a crime. I had traded it to a local gunshop, and had all the paperwork to show the legal trade. Had I not had that, My tail would have been swinging in the breeze.

Lending a firearm is not necessarily illegal. The term you're looking for is "straw purchase", not "straw possessor". A straw purchase would be purchasing a firearm for someone else. Here in PRHI it is perfectly legal for me to purchase a long gun, and lend it to someone for up to 15 days. There are certain conditions like the borrower has to be at least 16 years of age and in possession of a valid hunting license (for legal hunting firearms) or 18 years of age for all other legal purposes. If I'm still the legal owner of the firearm and simply lending it out for up to 15 days, then there's no problem. Handguns are a different story though. I can lend a handgun to another individual provided that I'm in close proximity to that individual.

Here in PRHI firearms owners are absolutely liable for damages caused by their firearms. One must seriously consider who they're lending thier firearms to.



gf

 

[Chinese Bandit]

She can buy a big Doberman and keep it close. Good home protection at all hours and can ride in the car too. No law against that anywhere. At the worst they can prosecute the dog for biting off his manhood.

 

[Glock Fan]

She can buy a big Doberman and keep it close. Good home protection at all hours and can ride in the car too. No law against that anywhere. At the worst they can prosecute the dog for biting off his manhood.

Great concept. I think you're on to something. This would be a new type of "Service Animal". :biggrin:



gf

 

[gun runner]

If she issued the TPO against her soon to be EX. The TPO is on him not her. There would be no legal action pending on her. He couldn't not buy a firearm but she can. But check the state laws in her area.